BREAST-Q Breast-Conserving Therapy Module: Normative Data from a Dutch Sample of 9059 Women.

Female Humans Mammaplasty / psychology Quality of Life Patient Satisfaction Mastectomy, Segmental Patient Reported Outcome Measures Breast Neoplasms / surgery

Journal

Plastic and reconstructive surgery
ISSN: 1529-4242
Titre abrégé: Plast Reconstr Surg
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 1306050

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
01 11 2022
Historique:
pubmed: 23 8 2022
medline: 29 10 2022
entrez: 22 8 2022
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

BREAST-Q, a patient-reported outcome measure for cosmetic and reconstructive breast surgery, is widely used in both clinical research and practice. The aim of this study was to acquire normative data of BREAST-Q's Breast-Conserving Therapy Module from a Dutch population sample and to compare it with existing normative BREAST-Q values. Flyers with QR codes, WhatsApp, and one academic center's Facebook and LinkedIn platforms were used to direct participants to self-complete an online version of four domains of the preoperative BREAST-Q Breast-Conserving Therapy Module. BREAST-Q domain scores were log transformed to normalize the distribution. Univariable regression analyses were used to assess (nonlinear) associations between age and BREAST-Q domain scores. Overall, 9059 questionnaire responses were analyzed. Median (±SD) BREAST-Q domain scores were 64.0 ± 18.0 (satisfaction with breasts), 69.0 ± 21.0 (psychosocial well-being), 92.0 ± 20 (physical well-being), and 59.0 ± 15.0 (sexual well-being). Age as a linear term was associated with log-transformed satisfaction with breasts, psychosocial well-being, and physical well-being; sexual well-being was a quadratic function of age. Previous breast surgery unrelated to breast cancer was a significant predictor for higher log-transformed satisfaction with breasts (β = 0.04, p < 0.001) and higher sexual well-being score (β = -0.05, p < 0.001). Compared with previously published normative data, small differences were found in mean BREAST-Q domain scores (mean differences ranging between 2.45 and 6.24). Normative Dutch BREAST-Q scores follow similar patterns across domains in comparison with previously published normative data. Normative Dutch BREAST-Q data enable future comparisons in breast-related satisfaction and quality of life issues of Dutch patients with breast cancer compared with their age-matched peers.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND
BREAST-Q, a patient-reported outcome measure for cosmetic and reconstructive breast surgery, is widely used in both clinical research and practice. The aim of this study was to acquire normative data of BREAST-Q's Breast-Conserving Therapy Module from a Dutch population sample and to compare it with existing normative BREAST-Q values.
METHODS
Flyers with QR codes, WhatsApp, and one academic center's Facebook and LinkedIn platforms were used to direct participants to self-complete an online version of four domains of the preoperative BREAST-Q Breast-Conserving Therapy Module. BREAST-Q domain scores were log transformed to normalize the distribution. Univariable regression analyses were used to assess (nonlinear) associations between age and BREAST-Q domain scores.
RESULTS
Overall, 9059 questionnaire responses were analyzed. Median (±SD) BREAST-Q domain scores were 64.0 ± 18.0 (satisfaction with breasts), 69.0 ± 21.0 (psychosocial well-being), 92.0 ± 20 (physical well-being), and 59.0 ± 15.0 (sexual well-being). Age as a linear term was associated with log-transformed satisfaction with breasts, psychosocial well-being, and physical well-being; sexual well-being was a quadratic function of age. Previous breast surgery unrelated to breast cancer was a significant predictor for higher log-transformed satisfaction with breasts (β = 0.04, p < 0.001) and higher sexual well-being score (β = -0.05, p < 0.001). Compared with previously published normative data, small differences were found in mean BREAST-Q domain scores (mean differences ranging between 2.45 and 6.24).
CONCLUSIONS
Normative Dutch BREAST-Q scores follow similar patterns across domains in comparison with previously published normative data. Normative Dutch BREAST-Q data enable future comparisons in breast-related satisfaction and quality of life issues of Dutch patients with breast cancer compared with their age-matched peers.

Identifiants

DOI: 10.1097/PRS.0000000000009607 PMID: 35994350 PMC: PMC9586822
pubmed: 35994350
doi: 10.1097/PRS.0000000000009607
pii: 00006534-202211000-00009
pmc: PMC9586822
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

985-993

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2022 The Authors. Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. on behalf of the American Society of Plastic Surgeons. All rights reserved.

Références

Integraal Kankercentrum Nederland. Kerncijfers over borstkanker uit de Nederlandse Kankerregistratie 1989-2019. Available at: https://iknl.nl/getmedia/2f489dc8-a103-4fd6-89fe-e266e589366f/borstkanker-in-nederland_flyer_2020.pdf . Accessed July 10, 2020.
Vondeling GT, Menezes GL, Dvortsin EP, et al. Burden of early, advanced and metastatic breast cancer in the Netherlands. BMC Cancer. 2018;18:262.
Janssen-Heijnen ML, van Steenbergen LN, Voogd AC, et al. Small but significant excess mortality compared with the general population for long-term survivors of breast cancer in the Netherlands. Ann Oncol. 2014;25:64–68.
van Maaren MC, de Munck L, de Bock GH, et al. 10 year survival after breast-conserving surgery plus radiotherapy compared with mastectomy in early breast cancer in the Netherlands: A population-based study. Lancet Oncol. 2016;17:1158–1170.
Slatman J. The meaning of body experience evaluation in oncology. Health Care Anal. 2011;19:295–311.
Michael YL, Kawachi I, Berkman LF, Holmes MD, Colditz GA. The persistent impact of breast carcinoma on functional health status: Prospective evidence from the Nurses’ Health Study. Cancer. 2000;89:2176–2186.
Stein KD, Syrjala KL, Andrykowski MA. Physical and psychological long-term and late effects of cancer. Cancer. 2008;112(11 Suppl):2577–2592.
Kool M, van der Sijp JR, Kroep JR, et al. Importance of patient reported outcome measures versus clinical outcomes for breast cancer patients evaluation on quality of care. Breast. 2016;27:62–68.
Tevis SE, James TA, Kuerer HM, et al. Patient-reported outcomes for breast cancer. Ann Surg Oncol. 2018;25:2839–2845.
Pusic AL, Klassen AF, Scott AM, Klok JA, Cordeiro PG, Cano SJ. Development of a new patient-reported outcome measure for breast surgery: The BREAST-Q. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2009;124:345–353.
Cohen WA, Mundy LR, Ballard TN, et al. The BREAST-Q in surgical research: A review of the literature 2009-2015. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2016;69:149–162.
Galina V, Laura B, Adam BS, et al. Measuring quality of life in routine oncology practice improves communication and patient well-being: A randomized controlled trial. J Clin Oncol. 2004;22:714–724.
Wright JG. Evaluating the outcome of treatment: Shouldn’t we be asking patients if they are better? J Clin Epidemiol. 2000;53:549–553.
O’Connor PJ. Normative data: Their definition, interpretation, and importance for primary care physicians. Fam Med. 1990;22:307–311.
Klifto KM, Aravind P, Major M, et al. Establishing institution-specific normative data for the BREAST-Q Reconstruction Module: A prospective study. Aesthet Surg J. 2020;40:NP348–NP355.
Mundy LR, Homa K, Klassen AF, Pusic AL, Kerrigan CL. Breast cancer and reconstruction: Normative data for interpreting the BREAST-Q. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2017;139:1046e–1055e.
LimeSurvey. Available at: https://www.limesurvey.org/ . Accessed July 1, 2020.
BREAST-Q Version 2.0. Available at: http://qportfolio.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/BREAST-Q-USERS-GUIDE.pdf . Accessed July 1, 2020.
Metcalfe KA, Semple J, Quan ML, et al. Changes in psychosocial functioning 1 year after mastectomy alone, delayed breast reconstruction, or immediate breast reconstruction. Ann Surg Oncol. 2012;19:233–241.
Borland H, Akram S. Age is no barrier to wanting to look good: Women on body image, age and advertising. Qual Market Res. 2007;10:310–333.
Greenleaf C. Self-objectification among physically active women. Sex Roles. 2005;52:51–62.
Tiggemann M, Lynch JE. Body image across the life span in adult women: The role of self-objectification. Dev Psychol. 2001;37:243–253.
Myers TA. Book review: Body Image: A Handbook of Science, Practice, and Prevention. Psychology of Women Quarterly. 2012;36:380–381.
Coriddi M, Angelos T, Nadeau M, Bennett M, Taylor A. Analysis of satisfaction and well-being in the short follow-up from breast augmentation using the BREAST-Q, a validated survey instrument. Aesthet Surg J. 2013;33:245–251.
Dreher R, Blaya C, Tenório JL, Saltz R, Ely PB, Ferrão YA. Quality of life and aesthetic plastic surgery: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open. 2016;4:e862.
Cano SJ, Klassen AF, Scott A, Alderman A, Pusic AL. Interpreting clinical differences in BREAST-Q scores: Minimal important difference. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2014;134:173e–175e.
Voineskos SH, Klassen AF, Cano SJ, Pusic AL, Gibbons CJ. Giving meaning to differences in BREAST-Q scores: Minimal important difference for breast reconstruction patients. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2020;145:11e–20e.
Beaton DE, Boers M, Wells GA. Many faces of the minimal clinically important difference (MCID): A literature review and directions for future research. Curr Opin Rheumatol. 2002;14:109–114.
Jaeschke R, Singer J, Guyatt GH. Measurement of health status: Ascertaining the minimal clinically important difference. Control Clin Trials. 1989;10:407–415.
Szklo M. Population-based cohort studies. Epidemiol Rev. 1998;20:81–90.
Population pyramid. Available at: https://www.cbs.nl/en-gb/visualisations/population-pyramid . Accessed February 27, 2021.
Heemskerk-Gerritsen BAM, Jager A, Koppert LB, et al. Survival after bilateral risk-reducing mastectomy in healthy BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2019;177:723–733.
Johnson HM, Irish W, Muzaffar M, Vohra NA, Wong JH. Quantifying the relationship between age at diagnosis and breast cancer-specific mortality. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2019;177:713–722.
Lagendijk M, van Maaren MC, Saadatmand S, et al. Breast conserving therapy and mastectomy revisited: Breast cancer-specific survival and the influence of prognostic factors in 129,692 patients. Int J Cancer. 2018;142:165–175.
Maxwell A, Özmen M, Iezzi A, Richardson J. Deriving population norms for the AQoL-6D and AQoL-8D multi-attribute utility instruments from web-based data. Qual Life Res. 2016;25:3209–3219.
Tourangeau R, Yan T. Sensitive questions in surveys. Psychol Bull. 2007;133:859–883.

Auteurs

Arvind Oemrawsingh (A)

From the Center for Medical Decision Making, Department of Public Health, and Academic Breast Cancer Center, Department of Surgical Oncology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Erasmus University Medical Center; and Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Patient-Reported Outcomes, Value and Experience (PROVE) Center, Brigham and Women's Hospital.

Marloes E Clarijs (ME)

From the Center for Medical Decision Making, Department of Public Health, and Academic Breast Cancer Center, Department of Surgical Oncology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Erasmus University Medical Center; and Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Patient-Reported Outcomes, Value and Experience (PROVE) Center, Brigham and Women's Hospital.

Andrea L Pusic (AL)

From the Center for Medical Decision Making, Department of Public Health, and Academic Breast Cancer Center, Department of Surgical Oncology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Erasmus University Medical Center; and Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Patient-Reported Outcomes, Value and Experience (PROVE) Center, Brigham and Women's Hospital.

Hester F Lingsma (HF)

From the Center for Medical Decision Making, Department of Public Health, and Academic Breast Cancer Center, Department of Surgical Oncology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Erasmus University Medical Center; and Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Patient-Reported Outcomes, Value and Experience (PROVE) Center, Brigham and Women's Hospital.

Cornelis Verhoef (C)

From the Center for Medical Decision Making, Department of Public Health, and Academic Breast Cancer Center, Department of Surgical Oncology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Erasmus University Medical Center; and Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Patient-Reported Outcomes, Value and Experience (PROVE) Center, Brigham and Women's Hospital.

Jan A Hazelzet (JA)

From the Center for Medical Decision Making, Department of Public Health, and Academic Breast Cancer Center, Department of Surgical Oncology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Erasmus University Medical Center; and Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Patient-Reported Outcomes, Value and Experience (PROVE) Center, Brigham and Women's Hospital.

Linetta B Koppert (LB)

From the Center for Medical Decision Making, Department of Public Health, and Academic Breast Cancer Center, Department of Surgical Oncology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Erasmus University Medical Center; and Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Patient-Reported Outcomes, Value and Experience (PROVE) Center, Brigham and Women's Hospital.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female

Evaluation of Low-Value Services Across Major Medicare Advantage Insurers and Traditional Medicare.

Ciara Duggan, Adam L Beckman, Ishani Ganguli et al.
1.00
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C

Effectiveness of Virtual Yoga for Chronic Low Back Pain: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Hallie Tankha, Devyn Gaskins, Amanda Shallcross et al.
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH

questionsmedicales.fr › Eucaryotes › Animaux › Chordés › Vertébrés › Mammifères › Eutheria › Primates › Haplorhini › Catarrhini › Hominidae › Humains › BREAST-Q Breast-Conserving Therapy Module:...
questionsmedicales.fr › Procédures de chirurgie opératoire › Procédures de chirurgie reconstructive › Mammoplastie › BREAST-Q Breast-Conserving Therapy Module:...
questionsmedicales.fr › Environnement et santé publique › Santé publique › Mesures épidémiologiques › Démographie › État de santé › Qualité de vie › BREAST-Q Breast-Conserving Therapy Module:...
questionsmedicales.fr › Qualité, accès, évaluation des soins de santé › Qualité des soins de santé › Mécanismes d'évaluation des soins de santé › Satisfaction des patients › BREAST-Q Breast-Conserving Therapy Module:...
questionsmedicales.fr › Procédures de chirurgie opératoire › Mastectomie › Mastectomie partielle › BREAST-Q Breast-Conserving Therapy Module:...
questionsmedicales.fr › Environnement et santé publique › Santé publique › Méthodes épidémiologiques › Collecte de données › Enquêtes et questionnaires › Enquêtes sur les soins de santé › Mesures des résultats rapportés par les patients › BREAST-Q Breast-Conserving Therapy Module:...
questionsmedicales.fr › Maladies de la peau et du tissu conjonctif › Maladies de la peau › Maladies du sein › Tumeurs du sein › BREAST-Q Breast-Conserving Therapy Module:...